So why is this 190 and Shawsank is 1?
-
The_Dougster — 9 years ago(September 26, 2016 05:53 PM)
because the americans don't care about the english and irish.
Many don't seem to realize that IMDb is actually a
British
web site.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMDb -
JordanMichaelKoch — 9 years ago(April 26, 2016 10:33 AM)
I can't exactly feel sorry for DDL's character in this movie. He incited a riot after stealing and playing guitar with something that looked like a gun. I'm only ten minutes in, but at this point I feel no empathy for DDL's character while I felt loads of empathy for Andy all throughout Shawshank.
-
ilon — 9 years ago(May 01, 2016 11:41 AM)
I can't exactly feel sorry for DDL's character in this movie. He incited a riot after stealing and playing guitar with something that looked like a gun.
Sorry, but I think the riot was generated by those men WITH GUNS overreacting over a man WITH A STICK. -
JordanMichaelKoch — 9 years ago(May 01, 2016 11:43 AM)
Regardless of whether or not the riot was his fault, he was a belligerent, petulant whiner throughout the entire movie. Shawshank Redemption was LITERALLY about not giving up hope. The character in this movie LITERALLY demanded that his father's legal counsel not give his father hope. He treated his father like crap, did drugs the whole time and displayed a flippant, uncaring and defeatist attitude throughout the movie.
This movie isn't as popular as Shawshank because the leads were wildly different. One was likable. The other was the opposite. -
ilon — 9 years ago(May 08, 2016 06:20 PM)
Regardless of whether or not the riot was his fault, he was a belligerent, petulant whiner throughout the entire movie.
Of course, you can change your mind all you want, but if you change your mind just to get your point across, how can I trust your opinion?
The character in this movie LITERALLY demanded that his father's legal counsel not give his father hope. He treated his father like crap, did drugs the whole time and displayed a flippant, uncaring and defeatist attitude throughout the movie.
So the character does not change throughout the film? I think he does, as does his relationship with his father. -
JordanMichaelKoch — 9 years ago(May 12, 2016 02:28 AM)
Spare me the sanctimonious baloney about changing my mind. It was a movie; if you think your mind doesn't change naturally from the first ten minutes to the end, you're full of yourself. I didn't change my mind.
I finished the movie.
But then again, your argument is thread bare, so I guess you have to resort to cheap tricks.
The protagonist of In the Name of the Father was not active. He was passive. He didn't take charge, he didn't force change, he didn't fight. Andy in Shawshank Redemption was active. He fought every single day. HE took charge, HE escaped, HE fought people that were against him. DDL's character did nothing; his father's lawyer did everything for him in spite of being told specifically to do nothing.
I guess I'll just have to remain in the majority with my opinion. In the Name of the Father is not beloved on a level remotely close to that of Shawshank. So go ahead and resort to cheap argument tactics to try to suggest you have a point. You don't. -
ilon — 9 years ago(May 16, 2016 09:42 AM)
I can't exactly feel sorry for DDL's character in this movie. He incited a riot after stealing and playing guitar with something that looked like a gun. I'm only ten minutes in, but at this point I feel no empathy for DDL's character
Ten minutes in you
don't want
to feel empathy for him. That's what I took from your comment, because I know that every character is supposed to go trough a transformation
Spare me the sanctimonious baloney about changing my mind. It was a movie; if you think your mind doesn't change naturally from the first ten minutes to the end, you're full of yourself. I didn't change my mind. I finished the movie.
and I know that my mind will change about the different aspects of the relations and attitudes shown in a film. But ten minutes in, you didn't.
Regardless of whether or not the riot was his fault
You prefer to overblow something in the movie that's not exactly what you say it is, to justify your dislike for the character.
I guess I'll just have to remain in the majority with my opinion. In the Name of the Father is not beloved on a level remotely close to that of Shawshank.
I don't like this movie more than Shawshank. In fact, I think it's just ok, but I'm fine with giving it a chance until the end before I open my mouth about a character as a whole, because I should be full of myself to do so.
And yes, I think by the end DDL's character has changed because of what he's been through. Is it a masterpiece? No. But there's nothing particualarly anoying about DDL's character that hasn't been present in numerous characters you like.
So go ahead and resort to cheap argument tactics to try to suggest you have a point. You don't.
That's what someone who knows doesn't have a point would say.